NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday sought the Centre’s response on a PIL challenging the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which barred any litigation seeking to change the character of a religious place from what it was at the time of independence.
A bench headed by Chief Justice S A Bobde issued notice to the Centre on the PIL filed by advocate-petitioner Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, who said the law is discriminatory as it deprived the Hindus, Jains and Buddhists from reclaiming their ancient places of worship which were damaged and converted to Mosques during the reign of Muslim Kings.
Eight months after the Ayodhya verdict, in June last year, a Hindu organisation had moved the SC seeking to open litigation route for ownership claim over disputed sites like those at Kashi and Mathura as it challenged the validity of the 1991 Act, which barred change in character of religious places after independence, even through court proceedings.
The Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute was the only exception made in the 1991 law as the suits were pending before trial court since 1949. A five-judge bench led by then CJI Ranjan Gogoi had on November 9, 2019 unanimously decided to award the disputed land at Ayodhya to Hindus saying they produced better evidence on ownership but had asked the government to compensate Muslims with an alternative five acre plot at a prominent place in Ayodhya.
The five-judge bench had referred to the 1991 Act in its 1,045 page Ayodhya verdict and said, “In providing a guarantee for preservation of the religious character of places of public worship as they existed on August 15, 1947 and against the conversion of places of public worship, Parliament determined that independence from colonial rule furnishes a constitutional basis for healing the injustices of the past by providing the confidence to every religious community that their places of worship will be preserved and that their character will not be altered.”
“Non-retrogression is a foundational feature of the fundamental constitutional principles of which secularism is a core component. The Places of Worship Act is thus a legislative intervention which preserves non-retrogression as an essential feature of our secular values,” it said.
But, the PIL filed by ‘Vishwa Bhadra Pujari Purohit Mahasangh’ through advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain said the observations relating to cardinality of 1991 Act were mere observations without any judicial force as the Act was not under challenge during the proceedings.
The petitioner said, “The 1991 Act has barred the right and remedy against encroachment made on religious property of Hindus exercising might of power by followers of another faith. The result is that Hindu devotees cannot raise their grievance by instituting any suit in Civil Court or invoking the jurisdiction of the High Courts against high handiness of ultras and will not be able to restore back the religious character of Hindu Endowments, Temples, Mutts etc from hoodlums if they had encroached upon such property before August 15, 1947 and such illegal and barbarian act will continue in perpetuity.”